Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896935052

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-238139

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 2

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XI Seiten, Seiten 570-1100

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part IV. The federations and the union // Chapter II. The commonwealth of Australia

Collection:: Economics Books

cHAP. 11] THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 837 that the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1904, could not apply to a state railway. The Court rejected this view on the ground that the rule of interpretation adopted in that case, and laid down in D’Emden v. Pedder, could not apply where a power conferred on the Common- wealth in express terms was of such a nature that its effective exercise manifestly involved the control of some operation of a State Government, and they instanced, as possible cases of such legislation, legislation based on the powers given by 3. 51 of the Constitution to legislate as to quarantine (ix), weights and measures (xv), immigration (xxvii), or trade and commerce with other countries and among the states (i). Moreover, the rule had no application to the question whether any specific thing might be brought within the state so as to become such a means or instrumentality. Further, it was pointed out that the doctrine, if applied in such a case, would utterly defeat the whole purpose of the creation of the Commonwealth, for the state could render null the Customs Act by importing all the goods required for use by any persons n the state as state property. Similarly quarantine and immigration laws could be set at naught and the whole peration of the Commonwealth prevented. (0) The Reserved Powers of the States The counterpart to the doctrine of the immunity of instrumentalities is the doctrine of reserved powers ; that is, powers which are reserved to the State Legislatures by the spirit of the Constitution, and which Commonwealth laws must not transgress, save in so far as such disregard is authorized by the express words or necessary intention of the Constitution itself. The doctrine appeared almost simul- taneously with that of the immunity of instrumentalities. In the State Railway Servants’ Case® the latter doctrine was applied to the state railways, but the Court also laid it down that subsections xxxii-xxxiv of s. 51 imported that in regard to such railways, save as regards transport for military + (1904) 1 C. L. R. 91. 4 C. L. R. 488: see Harrison Moore, op. cit., pp. 578 seq.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation